<quoted text>I understand your point. You want the government to redistribute wealth and decide who should be the winners and losers economically. I want equal opportunity while you want equal results. Many people have far more wealth than I have and I don't resent what they have made. I love rich people who spend that money and provide a market place that causes good jobs. The government can give nothing to one person that they don't take from another. I trust the market place to make those decisions more than I trust government. Should teachers make more money for the valuable job they do? Should rock stars make millions from singing? That is not for me to decide nor is it for the government to decide. The market place establishes the value of our work. I am kind of hard headed aren't I :)

the government is one side of the economic/political triangle ... big corporations being another side and the general public/small business the third side ....

So if the government can choose a flat tax system then they need to make other adjustments that would make it fair for everyone affected ... they can't make one change without doing something about the rest of the model it is part of.

It is my belief that a flat tax would in general be harder on the poor than on the rich unless you can get rid of all loopholes for the rich first. As per the example I gave for the trust fund, which a family could apply to reduce PERSONAL taxes paid by higher income families ... my friend paid at a lower tax rate than most families earning only $40,000. How is that fair?

the flat tax woudl only be fair if that $200,000 earner paid $10% f the $200,000.

<quoted text>The city has just got to big. People live in areas that are 12 foot below sea level. People there have always said some day the big one will come.

time for them to take a page out of the dutch book on how to manage dykes? After all, the Netherlands have land dozens of times that area also 10 to 15 feet below sea level .... but they have a dyke system that far surpasses anything anyone else has in cost but also in capability.

<quoted text>Discrimination goes well beyond the color of one's skin. I am deaf, not stupid. I cannot tell you how many people I've worked with who have treated me as if I were stupid because of my lack of hearing. If you worked for someone else, at your age they would phase you out for younger & prettier - I've seen it happen to friends.

I remember many years ago I used to sell computers. I had sold 4 of them to a small law firm that employed about a dozen people ... all talk done by phone and fax and email....

After 3 years I got to meet the head of the law firm, who I respected very much ... turns out he was 4' 10" tall and needed a wheel chair ... I bet anyone seeing him and not knowing anything about him would have presumed he was dumber than a doorknob ....

<quoted text>Oh very good, and surely it should be so, and definitely is a "must" about ill-addressed or un-addressed mental health issues among the populace toward acting on those issues. My allusion to the family holiday feast table was allegorical and figurative. At those times for close relatives and friends together at the dinner table, there is a finite setting and time for participating or listening to informed ( or not) exchanges of ideology, particularly entrenched ones, between cousin Terry, Aunt Frieda, and dad -- and the gang; OR, possibly Uncle Fred will reveal explicit details (unless tactfully thwarted by spouse or offspring) about his colonoscopy, or about graphic procedures and bodily functions relating to post-operative major surgery.My counterpoint is this:That is not exactly the environment here. Topical events ought to be recognized and discussed, I agree. But who among us is the arbiter of how many qualifies to continually counter-discuss another's ideology or demagoguery? "Free reign" you think; "the more the parrier", as it were?First post about the Sandy Hook school tragedy. Because of no expression of empathy and compassion, I didparry the gun show comment (since I've seen it before) with gun show until I self-moderated out of respect for the thread and Pretty Feet's posts from her circumstances.http://www.topix.com/forum/news/weird/TTJVITJ...I strive to moderate myself, although certainly do counter some posts I feel compelled to. Any inkling on the factor of exponential growth in the number of posts to fill thread pages in "debating" perfidious snake-oil dogma by the addition of each poster who is compelled to actively and persistently participate in same? A recent visitor here (not posting on weekends to my knowledge) may or may not return, but hinted at his inclination to counter ideology with *some* persistence. How many other partisans (either) will be attracted?Who among us (besides the moderators -- and ourselves) is the arbiter of how thread-newbies should post? I don't invoke the idioms of "idiot" or " 'tard", etc, but many do from "brain-laziness", personality and inclination. For me, not posting is the better option than that.To that end, "the more the parrier" will result in oh so similarity to quite a few threads and a point where long-time thread regulars will think or express: "whoa, what the hell happened here?" , some will quit participating, and some likely lacking in self-accountability.Thread food for thought.

In short, if we drag on the same subject too long and too passionately, and to many people jump on the bandwagon, and thus overtake the thread, we might alienate the regulars, in particular those not inclined to get involved in said discussions?

You have a good point ... and one for all of us to keep in mind ... there is a point when a dead horse was already dead a week ago ...

The counterpoint to this being .. that it is the varied and interesting discusions we have hear that make El's Kitchen unique and entertaining ... so we should not lose that aspect of the thread entirely.

we used to take them in these large gel capsules ... they were like swallowing a marble, my sister coudn't manage it, so my mom used to poke a hole and squirt it out into a small glass, then add a few drops of water and sugar.

<quoted text>on this I agree 100%....Idle chit chat I can have with the clerk at the coffee shop while i order ... I come to Topix to dsicuss interesting things and get a world view ... this is one reason why EL's thread is great, it has poeple posting from the UK and provides a different insight into world matters from what the North American media presents. Yet the folk here are reasonable and able to discuss things without getting into some silly arguement.

Isn't that great. Earlier we were talking about 47% pay no federal income tax. At least in England everyone pays tax which is fair. We don't have a VAT. I hate to say this because I hate tax but we are not paying enough tax when you consider wat we spend. We spend about 42% of our GDP and tax about 24%. You know who is the biggest buyer of US treasury notes? We are. The federal reserve buys our debt with money they create out of thin air. No nation can continue doing that.

<quoted text>the government is one side of the economic/political triangle ... big corporations being another side and the general public/small business the third side ....So if the government can choose a flat tax system then they need to make other adjustments that would make it fair for everyone affected ... they can't make one change without doing something about the rest of the model it is part of.It is my belief that a flat tax would in general be harder on the poor than on the rich unless you can get rid of all loopholes for the rich first. As per the example I gave for the trust fund, which a family could apply to reduce PERSONAL taxes paid by higher income families ... my friend paid at a lower tax rate than most families earning only $40,000. How is that fair?the flat tax woudl only be fair if that $200,000 earner paid $10% f the $200,000.

I favor repeal of federal income tax and going to a sales tax or a VAT tax. If we don't repeal income tax we will wind up with both the way England does. Corporation don't really pay tax. They just add the cost of tax to the cost of their product and the consumer pays the tax. We then find good we make can not compete on the world market. We have a spending problem not a tax problem. The people want everything free from the government and the government doesn't have the courage to raise tax to the same level of spending so we borrow and devalue our currency

<quoted text>I remember many years ago I used to sell computers. I had sold 4 of them to a small law firm that employed about a dozen people ... all talk done by phone and fax and email....After 3 years I got to meet the head of the law firm, who I respected very much ... turns out he was 4' 10" tall and needed a wheel chair ... I bet anyone seeing him and not knowing anything about him would have presumed he was dumber than a doorknob ....

LOL Like old Sam Walton driving around in his old beat up pickup truck. You can't judge a book by its cover. I used to work for a very rich man. He didn't own a watch and he bought a suit when his son got married. He was the smartest man I ever knew

<quoted text>we used to take them in these large gel capsules ... they were like swallowing a marble, my sister coudn't manage it, so my mom used to poke a hole and squirt it out into a small glass, then add a few drops of water and sugar.

<quoted text>on this I agree 100%....Idle chit chat I can have with the clerk at the coffee shop while i order ... I come to Topix to dsicuss interesting things and get a world view ... this is one reason why EL's thread is great, it has poeple posting from the UK and provides a different insight into world matters from what the North American media presents. Yet the folk here are reasonable and able to discuss things without getting into some silly arguement.

agree in FULL with discussing neat and interesting things and in a world view...

..."this is one reason why EL's thread is great, it has poeple posting from the UK and provides a different insight into world matters from what the North American media presents. Yet the folk here are reasonable and able to discuss things without getting into some silly arguement. "

<quoted text>In short, if we drag on the same subject too long and too passionately, and to many people jump on the bandwagon, and thus overtake the thread, we might alienate the regulars, in particular those not inclined to get involved in said discussions?You have a good point ... and one for all of us to keep in mind ... there is a point when a dead horse was already dead a week ago ...The counterpoint to this being .. that it is the varied and interesting discusions we have hear that make El's Kitchen unique and entertaining ... so we should not lose that aspect of the thread entirely.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Add your comments below

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite.
Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.